1 2025:CGHC:27428 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 746 of 2025 1 - Sudha Deshlahare W/o Vipin Deshlahare, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Mig 3/7, Mahaveer Nagar, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Currently Residing At Ward No. 02, Bazar Road, Dhamdha, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Vidhan Deshlahare S/o Vipin Deshlahare, Aged About 2 Years, Through His Mother Sudha Deshlahare W/o Vipin Deshlahare, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Mig 3/7, Mahaveer Nagar, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Currently Residing At Ward No. 02, Bazar Road, Dhamdha, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicants versus Vipin Dheshlahare S/o Banshilal Deshlahare Aged About 40 Years R/o Mig 37/, Mahaveer Nagar, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicants : Mr. Khulesh Sahu, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24.06.2025 1. This criminal revision has been filed by the applicants being aggrieved with the impugned order dated 22.03.2025 passed by the learned Family Court, Bemetara, District – Bemetara (C.G.) in Misc. Cr. Case No.253/2024, whereby the learned Family Court has partly allowed the application for grant of interim maintenance and directed PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.06.26 12:32:18 +0530 2 the respondent/husband to pay Rs. 1,000/- per month to the applicant No.1/wife and Rs.1,000/- per month to applicant No.2 as interim maintenance. Thus, this revision has been filed for enhancement of the interim maintenance amount. 2. The brief facts of the case is that the marriage between Applicant No. 1 and the respondent was solemnized on 07.07.2021 as per Hindu rites and customs at Nawagarh, District Bemetara. Out of the said wedlock, Applicant No. 2, a male child, was born on 29.03.2022. Applicant No. 1 is employed as a Food Inspector, drawing a modest salary of approximately 38,000/- per month, whereas the respondent is a qualified doctor holding an MDC degree from a reputed medical college in Maharashtra and is earning a monthly salary of ₹90,000/-, as admitted by him in his written response dated 01.02.2025. From the very inception of the matrimonial relationship, Applicant No. 1 faced severe harassment and cruelty at the hands of the respondent and his family members. She was subjected to mental and physical abuse, including dowry demands and persistent taunts. During her pregnancy, she was abandoned by the respondent, who left for Maharashtra without any concern for her well-being. The in-laws failed to provide even the basic care expected during such a crucial period, leaving her to fend for herself. Due to continued harassment. Applicant No. I was compelled to leave her matrimonial home and seek shelter at her paternal house along with her infant son. Upon her return to the matrimonial home on 31.03.2024, she was met with hostility. The respondent's relatives had gathered with the intention of expelling 3 her. Her belongings were thrown out of the house, and her character was unjustly maligned. The room allocated to the applicants was locked, and she was further humiliated with renewed dowry demands, including replacement of previously given articles with branded items. Despite the birth of Applicant No. 2, the respondent did not extend any support or assistance. Applicant No. 1 had to bear all expenses related to the child's upbringing, including his nutrition, clothing, medical treatment, and other daily requirements, which amount to more than ₹10,000/- per month. Furthermore, even when Applicant No. 1 lost her brother in October 2022 or when she met with a car accident, the respondent showed no concern or support. Due to such unbearable circumstances, the applicants have been compelled to reside separately in a rented accommodation. The respondent, despite being financially capable, has utterly failed to provide any financial assistance to his wife and minor son. Consequently, on 31.07.2024, the applicants preferred an application for maintenance before the learned Family Court, Bemetara, seeking interim maintenance of Rs.15,000/- per month for applicant No.1 and Rs.5,000/- per month for applicant No.2. The learned Family Court, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and evidence led by both the parties, granted maintenance amount in favour of the applicants as mentioned in paragraph 1 of this judgment which according to the applicants is meager. Hence, this revision. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the learned Family Court has failed to exercise its judicial discretion 4 judiciously while determining the quantum of interim maintenance payable to the applicants, resulting in manifest miscarriage of justice. The impugned order dated 22.03.2025, awarding a mere 1,000/- per month each to the wife and the minor son, is arbitrary, unreasonable, and does not reflect a proper consideration of the financial needs of the applicants or the financial capacity of the respondent. The applicant wife, though employed, draws a modest salary of Rs.38,000/- per month, out of which she has to manage rent, household expenses, and complete care of a minor child. On the other hand, the respondent, being a qualified doctor earning Rs.90,000/- per month, is financially far more capable of supporting both applicants but has been allowed to shirk his legal and moral responsibility. Thus, in view of the facts and circumstances of the present case, as well as the financial and social position of the parties, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to exercise its revisional jurisdiction to enhance the interim maintenance amount in a just, fair and reasonable manner to secure the rights and welfare of the applicants and to give effect to the true intent of the law. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 5. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants, and from the perusal of the orders of the Family Court, it transpires that the applicant No.1/wife herself is a government employee getting monthly salary of Rs.38,000/-. Further, the non-applicant/respondent is currently serving in the Government Medical College Gondia after doing MD. He is paid 5 Rs. 90,000/- per month by the government, from which he pays rent, food, water, even car loan installments and spends money for the treatment of his old parents. This apart, the applicants are currently living separately from the non-applicant, thus, in view of the initial legal responsibility of maintenance, the application for interim maintenance submitted by the applicants was partially accepted and the impugned award was passed granting Rs.1,000/- to each of the applicants till the resolution of this matter. As such, there is no illegality and infirmity while passing the said order. 6. Considering the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant herein and also considering the finding recorded by the learned Family Court, I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court. 7. Accordingly, the prayer made to quash/modify the impugned order is refused. 8. However, the present revision is disposed of with the direction that the concerned Family Court is at liberty to conclude the proceedings under Section 125 of CrPC, preferably within a period of three months from today, if there is no any legal impediment. 9. Registrar (Judicial) is directed to transmit a certified copy of this order to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti